Those with pinkish hair at the last election who desired a change of colour opted for a blue rinse.

Those true blue haired simply wished for more of the same.In both cases their voting choice was influenced by manifestos and election promises.

As far as either of those pitches was genuine, which every government proves or not, at least punters had a sense of what was on offer.

The National Party tag line was ‘‘getting the country back on track’’. Whatever that actually meant, those who were sold that line expected that the track was one which the National Party had directed. A National Track.

But little did those voters know that what would happen was the minnow parties to which MMP had delivered grossly disproportional bargaining clout, would wrangle deals which no National Party voter had even considered let alone agreed with. The track was not quite what was in view.

The Seymour and Peters view of the track was not same as National, and the country was left to swallow what Christopher Luxon declared was the Coalition Mandate.

What this actually meant was the outcome of weeks of horse trading and other machinations which saw signifiant add ons or departures from the National Track which National had to swallow if it wanted power.

But a mandate? Who voted for what was delivered?

The country had no choice but to suck it up for three years. It might be drawing a long bow to compare National Party voters with those who voted for the current US President who are repenting of their bargain, but surely there would be many who were and are dismayed by what has turned out to be a hair do of unappealing effect.

Or to apply another metaphor, those who believed they were buying a blueberry muffin, encountered unforeseen ingredients such as pieces of toilet soap and raw garlic.

As we face another election shortly, the prospect of another Coalition Mandate of the same or worse unforeseen outcomes must fill every sensible person with horror and dread.

What we have had to endure is bad enough ,but the probability of another three years of a coalition government which results from deal making outside of what passes as the democractic process should occasion the greatest alarm and repugnance.

So here is my solution. Each political party must, as part of its manifesto, declare its position in respect of the policies of other political parties and undertake, under the threat punishment of being forever disbarred or disqualified from political office, that in no circumstances would a coalition agreement be entered into with parties whose policies were inimical.

Red lines. Clearly drawn. Under that scenario, for example, there would be no way National would enter into a deal with Act over the Treaty Principles Bill.

That way the bargaining chips would not be at large, but would be clearly prescribed and proscribed. Voters would have real say in the end result.

And be more prepared to live with that for three years.

  • Peter Sara is a Dunedin lawyer.